Essa foi a piada do ano. Vc, por acaso, lê mentes humanas? Sempre senti atração por pessoas do mesmo sexo, sendo que nenhuma das minhas namoradas soube disso. Pelo menos à época……. E larguei esse teatro pois não nasci para ser ator e sim para ser feliz.

Pergunto-me se tal aversão aos homossexuais não é fruto de auto-afirmação. Explico: até os 21 anos eu era o primeiro da turma a falar mal de gays…. Era muito difícil aceitar minha natureza.

Nada como um dia após o outro.

Parece que a Suprema Corte dos EUA será instada a se manifestar sobre a qualificação de Barak Obama para ser Presidente dos Estados Unidos, aqui vai, em inglês, a íntegra da notícia.

“Philip J. Berg Will Be Arriving U.S. Supreme Court, Washington, DC at 3:15 p.m. today to file for an Injunction to Stay Presidential Election Pending Writ of Certiorari regarding Obama who is “NOT” qualified to be President of the United States

(Press Release – 10/30/08 – Contact information and pdf of press release at bottom)

(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 10/30/08) – Philip J. Berg, Esquire, the Attorney who filed suit against Barack H. Obama challenging Senator Obama’s lack of “qualifications” to serve as President of the United States, announced today that he will
be at the United States Supreme Court today, October 30, 2008 to file:

Application to Justice Souter for an Immediate Injunction to Stay the Presidential Election of November 4, 2008; and
Writ of Certiorari.
Berg stated, “I am hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will grant the Injunction pending a review of this case to avoid a Constitutional Crisis by insisting that Obama produce certified documentation that he is or is not a “natural born” citizen and if he cannot produce documentation that Obama be removed from the ballot for President.

Berg’s case, Berg vs. Obama was dismissed from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Docket # 08-cv-4083 for lack of standing. This is a question of who has standing to uphold our Constitution. If I don’t have standing, if you don’t have standing, if your neighbor doesn’t have standing to question the eligibility of an individual to be President of the United States – the Commander-in-Chief, the most powerful person in the world – then who does?

What happened to ‘…Government of the people, by the people, for the people,…’ Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address 1863.

We must legally prevent Obama, the unqualified candidate, from taking the Office of the Presidency of the United States,” Berg said.

Our website obamacrimes.com now has 86.1 + million hits.

Berg again stressed his position regarding the urgency of this case as, “we” the people, are heading to a “Constitutional Crisis” if this case is not resolved forthwith.

* * For copies of all Court Pleadings, go to obamacrimes.com

# # #

Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12
Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005
(610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659″

É mole? Essa seria uma decisão em que eu gostaria de ver o voto do Juiz Sccallia.

Abraços.

Não tenho como responder às suas perguntas. Demandaria um tempo de que realmente não disponho. Ademais, como você bem percebeu, eu sou um ignorante.

1869: Barred public accommodations and carrier segregation [Statute]
Prohibited excluding passengers from railroads, streetcars, steamboats, coaches or other vehicles based on race. Allowed for a person’s removal if they did not pay the fare, or engaged in disorderly conduct, or committed an act that injured the business of the carrier. Penalty: Forfeiture of the license and closing of the place of business; offender liable to suit by the injured party to recover damages.

1870: Anti-miscegenation [State Code]
Private or religious marriages legal to all persons of whatever race or color as well as to marriages formerly prohibited by any law of the state. No language prohibiting intermarriage or miscegenation.

1873: Barred public accommodations and carrier segregation [Statute]
Ensured all Louisiana and U.S. citizens equal and impartial access to use all common carriers on land and water, inns and all public resorts. Penalty: Forfeiture of business license. Liable for damages in favor of the injured party.

1890: Railroads [Statute]
Railway companies to provide equal but separate accommodations for white and colored passengers. Penalty: Passengers or conductors not complying with the law subject to a fine of $25 or imprisonment for 20 days. Officers and directors of railway companies that fail to comply guilty of a misdemeanor and could be fined between $100 and $500. Law did not apply to streetcars.

1894: Miscegenation [Statute]
Intermarriage between white persons and persons of color prohibited.

1894: Railroads [Statute]
Depots must provide equal but separate waiting rooms for the white and colored races. “No person shall occupy the wrong room.” Law must be posted in a conspicuous place. Penalty: Persons who insist on entering the improper place may be fined $25 or imprisoned up to 30 days. Agents failing to enforce the law guilty of misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of $25 to $50.

1898: Education [Constitution]
General Assembly to establish free public schools for the white and colored races.

1902: Streetcars [Statute]
All streetcars must provide separate but equal accommodations. Penalty: Passengers or conductors not complying could receive a fine of $25 or imprisonment up to 30 days. A railway company that refused to comply could receive a fine of $100, or imprisonment between 60 days and six months.

1908: Public accommodation [Statute]
Unlawful for whites and blacks to buy and consume alcohol on the same premises. Penalty: Misdemeanor, punishable by a fine between $50 to $500, or imprisonment in the parish prison or jail up to two years.

1908: Miscegenation [Statute]
Concubinage between the Caucasian or white race and any person of the Negro or black race is a felony. Penalty: Imprisonment from one month to one year, with or without hard labor.

1910: Miscegenation [Statute]
Restatement of the law passed in 1908, using the words “Persons of the Caucasian and colored races.”

1912: Residential [Statute]
Building permits for building Negro houses in white communities, or any portion of a community inhabited principally by white people, and vice versa prohibited. Penalty: violators fined from $50 to $2,000, “and the municipality shall have the right to cause said building to be removed and destroyed.”

1914: Public accommodation [Statute]
All circuses, shows and tent exhibitions required to provide two ticket offices with individual ticket sellers and two entrances to the performance for each race.

1918: Prisons [Statute]
Provided for the segregation of the races in all municipal, parish and state prisons.

1921: Housing [Statute]
Prohibited Negro and white families from living in the same dwelling place.

1921: Education [Constitution]
Called for separate, free public schools for the education of white and black children between the ages of six and eighteen years.

1928: Public Carrier [Statute]
Equal but separate accommodations to be provided on all public carriers.

1932: Miscegenation [State Code]
Outlawed interracial marriages. Nullified interracial marriages if parties went to another jurisdiction where such marriages were legal. Also prohibited Negroes and Indians to marry each other.

1932: Residential [State Code]
No person or corporation shall rent an apartment in an apartment house or other like structure to a person who is not of the same race as the other occupants.

1942: Health Care [Statute]
Separate but equal accommodations for the races to be provided in old age homes.

1951: Adoption [Statute]
Forbid interracial adoptions.

1951: Miscegenation [Statute]
Cohabitation between whites and blacks illegal. Penalty: Up to $1,000, or up to five years imprisonment, or both.

1952: Miscegenation [State Code]
Prohibited marriage between whites and persons of color. Penalty: Up to $1,000 and/or five years imprisonment.

1954: Education [Statute]
Immediately after the Brown decision, Louisiana amended its Constitution to state that all public and elementary schools would be operated separately for white and black children. Penalty: $500 to $1,000 for not enforcing and imprisonment from three to six months.

1956: Recreation [Statute]
Firms were prohibited from permitting on their premises any dancing, social functions, entertainments, athletic training, games, sports or contests in which the participants are members of the white and Negro races.

1956: Public carriers [Statute]
Revised older laws requiring that common carriers provide separate waiting rooms for white intrastate passengers and for Negro intrastate and interstate passengers.

1956: Employment [Statute]
Provided that all persons, firms or corporations create separate bathroom facilities for members of the white and Negro races employed by them or permitted to come upon their premises. In addition, separate eating places in separate rooms as well as separate eating and drinking utensils were to be provided for members of the white and Negro races. Penalty: Misdemeanor, $100 to $1,000, 60 days to one year imprisonment.

1956: Public accommodations [Statute]
All public parks, recreation centers, playgrounds, etc. would be segregated. This provision was made “for the purpose of protecting the public health, morals and the peace and good order in the state and not because of race.”

1957: Education [Constitution]
All public schools to be racially segregated.

1957: Education [Statute]
Compulsory attendance suspended in school systems where integration ordered; no state funds to non-segregated schools.

1958: Health Care [Statute]
All human blood to be used in the state of Louisiana for transfusions to be labeled with the word “Caucasian,” “Negroid,” or “Mongoloid” so as to clearly indicate the race of the donor. If the blood was not labeled it was not permitted to be used.

1960: Voting rights [Statute]
Required that the race of all candidates named on ballots be designated.”

Quanto a senteça de Ferguson, me parece que você nunca deve ter lido algo a respeito das decisões de 1º Grau nos EUA. Foi apenas um teste, e você agora confirmou sua ignorância (no sentido de desconhecimento) a respeito.

Minha interpretação do trecho “[these questions] are not properly put in issue in this case” é diferente da sua. Leio-o assim: “[essas questões] não estão propriamente (ou particularmente) postas em discussão neste caso”. Se o advérbio “properly” estivesse posposto ao “put”, aí sim penso que sua tradução seria mais plausível. De um modo ou de outro, o fato é que a Suprema Corte não abordou tal questão no julgado em referência, limitando-se a analisar o caso à luz das Emendas 13 e 14.

A expressão “creole” na Louisianna referia-se, naquele tempo, às pessoas que eram descendentes dos antigos colonizadores de origem francesa da região (os elementos negro e francês ainda são muito fortes na Louisianna, em especial em New Orleans, cidade que tive o privilégio de conhecer anos atrás, bem antes do Katrina passar por lá). Na época, não tinha conteúdo pejorativo, tanto é que o próprio comitê que citei no meu comentário – o “Citizens’ Committee of African Americans and Creoles” – utilizava a expressão no seu nome. O termo que costuma ser utilizado de forma mais pejorativa contra os negros nos EUA – equivalente ao seu “negrada” – é “nigger”. Não venha, portanto, propor compensação de culpas.

Falando em tal comitê, você agora passou a questionar-lhe a credibilidade para defender os direitos dos negros, já que seria um “um grupo formado por aparentemente brancos”. Agora não é só o Plessy que é aparentemente branco, é todo o comitê! Na verdade, fossem todos aparentemente brancos, talvez Plessy não teria sido o escolhido para violar a norma.

Você afirma também, com base exclusivamente na sua peculiar capacidade de analisar criticamente fatos históricos, que a intervenção de tal grupo se deu posteriormente à prisão de Plessy, de modo oportunista. Bem, se você prefere criar sua própria versão da história, sem qualquer fonte idônea (ainda que da Internet), fique à vontade! Mas não me terá como adepto.

Quanto à indagação que você fez ao final, se o referido comitê “fez alguma coisa contra a chamada PIG Law”, não saberia lhe responder com exatidão, pois precisaria pesquisar. Mas duas informações, que constam na sua própria mensagem, me levam a imaginar que não: (1) dita lei vigorou no Estado do Mississippi, ao passo que o comitê tinha atuação no Estado da Louisianna; (2) a lei foi revogada em 1887, quando, salvo engano, ainda não havia sido criado o mencionado comitê.

Por fim, há uma última observação – dessa vez, última mesmo – que gostaria de fazer. Em meu comentário anterior, eu lhe pedi para que me fornecesse indicação de como ter acesso à sentença original do Juiz Ferguson, cuja leitura você enfaticamente (para não dizer outra coisa) me indicou. Agora você vem e diz: “tenho certeza que você encontrará e apreciará a leitura, pelo visto você é muito bom entendedor da lingua Yanke.” De duas, uma: (1) ou você possui o texto da sentença, mas, por grosseria ou egoísmo, não deseja compartilhá-lo comigo, (2) ou você mesmo nunca viu o texto da sentença e não passa de um péssimo blefador.